>> i'm richelle carey. here are the latest headlines. john kerry arrived in lithuania this morning to discuss intervention in syria. e.u.'s chief policy cleave said a clear and strong response is crucial in syria. kerry is now headed to france where he'll give a joint news conference with the french foreign minister. millions of americans are still unemployed. yesterday's august jobs report was called discouraging. this morning tokyo is taking its pitch to the international

olympic committee. istanbul made its presentation earlier today, and madrid is scheduled to go before the ioc and the winner is expected to be announced at 4:00 eastern. >> the experimental aircraft blasted off last night. will head to the moon and then crash to the surface. next "consider this." >> american spy agencies are furious over new leaks about how

they gather intelligence. we now know the nsa got around encryption intended to protect e-mails and financial transactions many on websites you use every day. but consider this: after weeks of leaks from edward snowden have we reached a tipping point to direct damage to our financial security. are we in the point of repeating history? another money melt down? plus the lone ranger, was among box office duds over the past few months but was it a summer of box office duds. nothing separating you from a thousand foot fall but a steel beam, the documentary sky dancer takes us inside the world of ironworkers and native americans. i'm antonio mora. welcome to consider this. the nsa has found a way to crack

through walls intended to keep information private. reports on those leaked documents in the new york time and pro-publica, shows how the nsa can expose a vast amount of information even encrypted ones. letting the rest of the world know what our spy agencies are up to. last month president obama was forced to address the endless trail of surveillance leaks. we can and must be more transparent so i've directed the intelligence community to make public as much information about these programs as possible. >> but this transparency courtesy of mr. snowden is not likely what the president was referring to. and the government asked the news agencies not to publish publish these leaks. propublica, saying it might prompt foreign targets oswitch to new forms of encryption or communications that would be harder to collect or read. both news organization he said they removed some specific

facts, but decided to publish because of the value of the public debate about government actions that they say weakened the most powerful tools for protecting the privacy of americans and others. but how much information is too much? joining me now to talk about the latest revelations from former nsa analyst edward snowden are james larson a reporter for propublica, and james barrett, britain's equivalent of the cia. and matthew green a cryptography researcher from johns hopkins university. i thank you gentlemen for joining us today. fascinating story jeff looking through these documents. the laterrest dump of documents from edward snowden is again enormous. what is the most striking piece of information you want to cover? >> well, i think the fact that the nsa has waged a decade long

war against the encryption we use every day oprotect our communications. in the '90s we had this sort of idea proposed as a public program called the clipper chip where they would hold one encryption key to unlock communications and another key would be to protect the communications to the people you were communicating with. but in this case documents show they have been waging a secret campaign to undermine encryption by inserting back towards influencing standards and looking for software vulnerabilities that are not necessarily known to the public. >> but what in the end is the big deal? they are not supposed to look at any american communications unless they have a warrant. >> sure. it's strange how they define look at. but the point that i would bring is that we found a document that says they want to do opportunistic decryption. they want to decrypt anything they can and assess intelligence

value after the fact. that could include american communications, although we don't really know that. >> now richard the nsa is business. from the begin is really to break codes, to make sure they can find out information about people's communications. should this information have gotten out to the public? >> well i think there's all sorts of arguments for a public debate about things about what the nsa should and shouldn't do. jeff referred to the one in the 1990s that's been a common theam about the discourse of intelligence collection by the nsa for many decades. but here the problem for nsa is that the whole business of decryption you know of being able to break people's codes is a sort of cat and mouse game. you're always playing catchup because they will produce a better system. >> they'll figure how to break it. >> so on so forth. the fact that this is now being revealed that so many encryption

systems have been broken by nsa whether by back doors or crunching the numbers as it were clearly makes the enemy much more alert and probably inclined to change their cycles. >> it could hurt homeland security. >> i would have thought. >> matthew you were a cripping to reafer cripcrippin crip cripping t crip cryptographer. >> you're not breaking the mathematical crypto, they are making security systems less secure in the process of trying to spy and collect this information. and these are in many cases security systems used by americans and american companies. so i think that's a pretty big concern. >> but how does it really end up hurting us though? i guess that's my question in the end.

is how does it hurt americans if they're not using it to get into our -- you know our financial transactions and our e-mails? >> so if we could be sure that the only people who could crack this encryption were the nsa and nobody else could do it, you know there would still be some public debate. but it wouldn't be quite so worrying. the problem is -- >> is your concern by creating those back doors that other people can get through back >> exactly. it is hard to build a back door that only you can use. other people in the world have capability too and we don't know what's going ohappen. >> and google has worked very quickly to try to encrypt data in facilities around the world because they don't want to have the nsa to get into this. do you see this as a backlash jeff? >> i think policy matthew and

his crippin cryptographer friends. >> why they published the story, it's certainly true that some number of bad actors possibly possibly would be terrorists, means they assume to be safe through law enforcement or intelligence agency some of these bad actors -- >> i got to stop you because this is actually a statement, this is a state o statement thae quoted in our story down at the bottom. i'm sorry. >> i'm sorry i had this as something it was part of -- well one of the explanation that you did make you compared it to world war ii and the breaking of the codes of the japanese. and the chicago tribune published it out there, that was one of the things that you said look back at history that that was probably not appropriate but that that was apples and oranges but this wasn't. how can you tell our enemies

that we can decipher their information but break their codes? >> the fact of the matter is that this encryption technology is in use by everybody, right? there's no alternate ssl that you can use in your browser, there's no browser plug-in where you can sort of switch to a different encryption technology. this is a technology that you use every day for your communications, right? so would be terrorists cannot use a different ssl. we talked about ssl and vpns that they were able to crack and put back doors in. it's not that those encryption sold are only sold to foreign countries. they're also sold in the united states. >> looking at what's happened in the last several weeks, that ended the closing of all these diplomatic missions throughout the middle east and interceptions communications with respect to the syrian

chemical weapons attack, do you think that something like this could hurt the ability of the united states to be able to intercept those kinds of communications in the future? >> the answer is yes i do think it could hurt the united states. but there's a point of principle here. the nsa and the other intelligence agencies classify things according to the sensitivity, according to the importance that they you know ascribe to it for national security. so sure. the agencies sometimes overclassify things. but if it's top crest cod -- top secret code word, you believe it to be top secret. who owns those secrets? the government owns those secrets. for the better good al qaeda is plotting a major attack or that syria has deployed the syrian regime has deployed some

chemical weapons or something, that's fine, they own that information and they decide to reveal it. of course there is discourse whether it's going to hample the capabilities - marm the capability of the nsa or otherwise. >> i don't have the republic article -- >> i was mistaken. it was -- >> it was the republica explanation of what happened. >> i'm sorry. >> why don't we go back to it and finish it off so you hear it. it said that it's certainly true that some number of bad actors possibly including would be terrorists, law enforcement or intelligence agencies. some of these bad actors may now change their behavior in response to our story. so again as to what richard was saying, doesn't that worry you that that door is being opened? >> sure.

and you know, in the -- in the newsroom yesterday, in the new york times newsroom yesterday, we spent many hours in over the course of reporting this we spent many hours debating exactly this point, right? are we opening up too much information or are we informing the public about ways in which the nsa is actively, you know, sort of surreptitiously harming -- you know weakening american communications. >> of course where the balance is and where you draw the line. i wanted to look at something matthew. the director of the national being, activity, anything that yesterday's disclosures to the -- add to the ongoing public debate is outwayed by the road map they give to our adversaries about the specific means we are

taking to intercept mayor communications. richard and jeff i'd like you to have a shot at it. >> i wish i had a good answer. right now you know it seems like there's a lot of information in these leaks but as a cryptographer trying to find out how to unlock these i don't know how to start. how do i communicate securely today i don't know what the answer is but certainly i do know that there -- you know things need to be rebuilt from scratch. >> let's talk a little more about other snowden leaks. the washington post recently published a story about a lot of details about a black budget, $52.6 billion surveillance program, cutting edge technologies, agency recruiting ongoing operations including information on sensors monitoring syria and north korea, very specific, richard is this way too much to be giving out to the public do we need to know the specifics in because

that enemies can figure out what we're doing with our money? >> actually i don't think that's so bad to give out the budget head lines. one of the interestin interestii saw from that report that jeff did was that out of that 52.6 billion one-third was being spent on counterterrorism. and i think that's an interesting public debate there as to whether we circulate really be spending $27.7 billion on counterterrorism. >> i think it's just the line item detail that's more the issue rather than the money. i mean you could -- revealing that the money is being spent is one thing. another thing is actually giving all that information how it's being spent. >> oh absolutely, then if you go to the line item detail i think that's damaging but the overall amount of money that the united states is spending on this amount of security i think is a very valuable one to have. >> you layer these stories about high school hackers getting into all sorts of databases and breaking into companies, syrian

group that just recently shut down the new york times for a day, don't we all kind of expect that there are going to be people who are going obe able to get into our stuff? >> i mean right now, yeah. that's the problem is that we already know that the systems we have are vulnerable. the problem is we don't need anyone else making them worse and that's what's happening here. >> you think the nsa is really hurting matters? >> i think that opening up new vulnerabilities the is the worst possible thing you could do and undermining trust in standard agencies which is another thing that came out in these leaks is another big concern. >> matthew jeff richard, i appreciate you coming here discussing this important topic serge a important topic all summer long. are we in danger of another melt down and what do you think? our being social media producer hermella

>> we're nearing the five year anniversary of the investment bank collapse that kicked off the great recession which destroyed trillions of dollars in assets and threw millions out of work. lehman brothers petitioned the courts for bankruptcy on september 15th of 2008, it is still the biggest bankruptcy in u.s. history. the august job numbers out friday are the largest indicators to show how far america has to go before the crisis is actually over. true, unemployment ticked down a 10th of a point to 7.3% but that is because the labor participation rate which charts the number of people either working or look for work slid to 63.2%.

that is its lowest level since 1978. for more on the lehman anniversary and the danger of another wall street collapse i'm joined by dennis kelleher executive. for wall street watch dogs. wallace gorman, told bloomberg news, and i quote, the way these firms are managed, the amount of liquidity they have, the change in business mix it's dramatic. he thinks no chance. what do you think? >> well, the only thing that's really close to zero is the likelihood of a ceo of a wall street bank is accurate you know these are the same people, the wallets too big to fail too dwaing -- dangerous to fail banks, we don't need regulation.

market knows best we have the best risk management program in the world, in history. and we also are by the way the best management in history. and what did they do? in about seven years they crashed the global financial system and almost caused a second great depression. and now these mouth pieces that only exist because of the federal government and u.s. taxpayers bailed them out, they're now saying ho the chance of another crisis it's impossible. trust us. we got this under control. well we've already seen and experienced the consequences of this type of arrogance and hubris, before. and the american people frankly can't afford it again. >> and the reality is that the numbers can be really staggering when you look at them. right now the u.s. national debt is closing in on 17 trillion while the civil largest banks have a collective debt that is more than half that number, 8.7 trillion. are those banks still after everything that's happened when you look at those numbers too

big to fail? if one of them ran into trouble like h lehman, what would it take? >> we are talking about a handful of less than 20 of the biggest banks largely centered on wall street that are so big, complex and interconnected that if they fail, they would cause the failure of the united states financial system, and the economy. those banks actually have like a damoclese sword, over the american people who is depending on their risk management and then behaving themselves and them not being reckless like they have before. >> they have been capitalized and congress passed the dodd frank bill, when you talk about derivatives, you know they're trying to to protect against

those big bets that caused all the problems. is the regulation that's in place now not enough? >> well, it's important for people to know what while the law, financial law was passed a little over three years ago, it's largely not implemented yet. that's because wall street is on a war against financial regulation. they have purchased virtually every lawyer, lobbyist, pr spinner trade front group as they can with their unlimited resources and they have frustrated the implementation of effective financial reform. there have been some very good moves by some of the agencies, the fdic has done a terrific job, the ctic should be singled out for doing a great job. fed has a lot way to go treasury has a long way to go. things are better there's no question there's better regulation in place right now but if you look at the

implementation of the law as a baseball game we're probably own in the fifth inning and it will be a while before new regulations are in place are effective and more importantly whether they are going to be effectively enforced. >> let's look add a little bit of history. back in the 1980s congress and the white house started lifting regulations that have been in place since the great depression and that led to a major spurt in growth and unemployment. why should we go abecome to more intense regulations now? >> well first of all this country had the heaviest regulation on the financial industry from approximately 1940 through the 1990s and at the same time that they had the heaviest regulation, we also had the greatest prosperity, built the largest middle class in the history of the world and wall street and our financial industry prospered. >> but does the 1970s kind of

a dead decade, the dow jones industrials were almost stagnant for 15 years and when the deregulation started happening we saw a spurt in growth in the 1980s and 90s. >> before the great depreparation we had what was called opanic, a mini depression for every ten years until we had the grade depression. the reforms made after the great depression they lasted and if you look at the stability of the financial system over that period of time, under very heavy regulation, it really protected main street from wall street. that doesn't mean that the law of economic cycles is going to be repealed and that there aren't going to be up times and down times. what it means is that the likelihood of wall street crashing the financial system is minimized and that's what happened under regulation. what happened under deregulation, what happened over a period of years but reached a

crcrescendo in 2000 only took wl street's high risk to crash the system. >> a major global investment firm wrote recently that the passivity was playing a major role in limiting economic growth. given polarization, the bipartisan bickering we're seeing in washington, the naibility to reach any agreement, congress and the president have not been able to pass a budget for years, that is one of the gray restrainers of the economy for years, do you agree? >> no. there should be less bickering, less partisanship, less responsible steward -- more responsible stewardship. wreckage created by the financial crisis of '08, if you look at what happened as a

result of the financial crisis the plummeting economic growth, the plummeting tax revenue, the dramatic need and increase for spending on social programs, ought of that the deficits happened as a result of the financial crisis. and you look at the fed policy whether it's the zero interest rates which largely benefit wall street some derivative effects, all of that is to help the economy recover from the damage created by the financial craft. >> so you really think that today's job numbers that they have been weak all summer it's all continuing fallout from the collapse of lehman and the problems that triggered? >> i wouldn't say all. it's a complex global economy but the great majority of the economic hole that this country is still trying to dig out of was created by wallet wall stred the crash.

we now have the highest long term unemployment in the world. holding onto jobs both because they are unemployed and underemployed. >> wouldn't be the way for business would be to try ocreate jobs the places who are really the job creators? >> well let's be clear. because the job creators are on main street not wall street. wall street has proved itself to be a job killer of historic proportion. but obviously we should have policies that support the economy and support actual growing businesses. what we have now is a lack of the supply of credit, to the real economy, but that's not because of government policies. it's because there's fundamentally a lack of demand from main street largely because of not just unemployment. the deleveraging at the personal household level and the great concern the american people still have about their financial

condition which is warranted based on all the economic factors that's -- >> but would argue that we still have a very high corporate tax rate, higher than the industrialized world. our final question for you, there have been calls for conservative and liberals, very few have been prosecuted in your opinion has attorney general holder and the justice department an the sec have they been aggressive enough in going after people who were involved in all of this? >> i think it's an objective fact that they have a shameful record of abdicating their responsibility to apply the rule of justice the same on wall street as on main street. there has been a crime spree on wall street for over a decade. the cops have been off the beat. i don't know what it would take this department of justice to find a crime on wall street but it's extremely difficult because they haven't done it. you have the biggest crash of the global financial system since 1929.

they can't find anyone who broke a law anywhere? it's strange believability. >> dennis kelleher thanks for coming on consider this. next, ironman grossed $22 billion worldwide, why is this summer a flop?

>> how do we know they're coming? they're coming. pretty awesome. arggg ! >> i never understood what you all went through, you changed my hard. >> consider this labor day has come and gone, and that means the end of summer movies. some have dubbed 2013 as the summer of the flop with a lot of seemingly sure fire summer block busters failing at the box office. but it ended up being the most profitable movie summer ever. what does it mean?

here to discuss this topic is ben mankowitz and al jazeera culture critic bill wyman. written extensively on media and the arts. great to have you with us tonight. we heard so much about the flops. but then we looked at the numbers and it seems like the summer was a success. ticket revenue was 4.71 billion, attendance rose 6.6% to about 573 million. so bill why would people have called this a bad summer for movies? >> well, because they're making a lot of money on a lot of movies that they weren't making a lot of money on a lot of other movies. they released a lot more movies this summer than they have last year. and they released a lot more of what you called the tent poles and the block busters this summer so there's a lot of cost that g go into that so that underniens profitability.

the second thing we got to remember is that while attendance was up this summer it's down pretty much over the year. and attendance really isn't that up over the last ten or 15 years. it's less than it was ten years ago and it's about the same it was 15 years ago. obviously we've had a lot of population growth in that time. so basically, the industry is not growing. what they're doing is they're taking more money from the people who are going to the movies. >> ben do you agree with bill? there were a lot more movies released this summer than last year. >> yeah and also remember when you talk about revenue you're including revenue from some of the movies that are well acknowledged to be flops just domestically. if you talk about pacific rim, wolverine, hang over 3, and what's the last one i have here and the lone ranger, those movies which were all flops, a lot of money spent to make them or market them those movies made or generated revenue of $428 million domestically.

that adds up to the figures but all four of those movies were considered flops, well, most of them are also pretty bad. >> let's look at the top five highest grossing movies, ironman 3, despicable me two, monsters university, fast and furious six. been, any of those is is a sequel or remake. it seems like the big movies and the movies that make a lot of movies are sequels or prequels or whatever, what motivation is there to seek out new material? >> i 30 for studios or investors who want to put 100 million into a movie or 50 million into a movie, verily motivation. we know osk tim oscar time they will not be nominated. many of them are very good as you head into september or

october you're going to see those movies that are going to get nominations come oscar time. >> we have those five but there was also smurfs two, been mentioned star reds two, despicable me, wolverine, had to do with that series, kick as two, percy jackson , a sequel to the first per percy jackson movie. >> there was a peak about two or three years ago where the entire top 10 were all sequel, reboots remakes, based on comic books. if i remember correctly 17 of the top 20. this year it actually went down. one of the interesting things that happened this year you had a lot of movies like pacific rim elesium there's one other that

i'm forgetting world war z right, original big budget movies that didn't fall into these categories. and the verdict is actually mixed. word war z played a lot more money than people thought, it was going to be a flop. >> was that on the list of the ones ben didn't like. >> the reason world war z did better than the others was it turned out to be good. >> you like zombies then. lets talk about this clip and talk about what went wrong. >> going somewhere? >> no. >> yes. >> no. >> yes. >> shut up! >> yes. >> this was disney it start johnny depp what went wrong, what does it mean for future

movies when you spend that kind of money on a movie that's going to lose $150 million for disney. >> you can't blame disney, they made a movie like that based on a ride at disneyland. it was pirates of the caribbean. smurves made a littl smurve smurfs made a little bit of money. alvin and the chipmunks played a little bit of money. >> well disney will just go out of business. despite these critical failures

there were some good movies. >> woody allen's blue jasmine was great. francis hau, is a terrific movie, i just got back from the telluride film festival. i think we want to characterize one season of movies as a trend. you don't base a trend on one season. but the trend was started years ago with what bill described. reboots and comic book movies and the hunger games movies where they anticipate a sequel coming. >> let's go to hermella aregawi our social media producer for some comments.

>> hollywood seems the only industry that continues to increase prices as viewership goes down. cost seems no longer worth it, what's your response? >> it's difficult to unpack the movie industry. it's very duplicated. there's international rights and movies and dvds, and things like that they are taking more money out of people who come to the theaters. every friday and saturday all the kids go to the theaters to see the big bang smash 'em up, multimedia fare right? they are degrading the movie experience, but they're still getting a lot of money out of these people. but you can't blame them. and this is what i mean by it being a complicated industry. the music industry has seen its sales down 40, 55, almost 60% in

the last 15 years. the movie industry has seen its income going up. disney for all we make fun of it has an enormous market capitalization, no one would have dreamed disney was doing it that way. we are dealing in a very difficult economy with prioriticy, video games competing for us and we're doing very well, thank you very much. >> ticket prices we've always complained about them but spielberg said something funny, you are going to have to pay $25 to see the next ironman but only $7 to see lincoln which he directed. more more indie

films? >> i was reading an article it happened to be by bill, and what he didn't mention was competition from i think it was television, and bill mentioned the last time a sort of grown up movie won best picture and it was an adult movie and made a lot of money and you have to go back to 1998, and saving private ryan, i guess it didn't make best picture. 1998 is the year the sopranos debuted on television. when you talk about when kids are going to the movies it's not so much movies that we're watching on the dvd at home but it's this string of really incredible in depth well written television shows, movies were paranoid in the 1950s. i think hollywood ought to be more paranoid about twefl than ever before.

>> people yuf to be synopsis about tv now it seems that tv is the more significant cultural achievement right now for hollywood these days. before i go i want to ask you guys. bill i start with you, what movie are you looking forward to most this fall and any predictions for oscars? >> it's hard to tell. one of the things we are seeing, because summer has been taken over by block busters, prestige movies are clustered towards the end of the are year. the cohen brothers, everyone says this portrait of greenwich village folk scene that produced bob dylan could be the best movie. >> go ahead. >> i like nebraska, alex payne's nebraska is terrific, everyone should see it and everyone will like it.

>> gentlemen, look forward to having you back on. and coming up, the olympics

(vo) every sunday night gripping films from the world's top documentary directors. >> this is just the beginning of something much bigger. >> i am now in this place where you should never come.

(vo) tomorrow night, the premiere of skydancer. >> there's this myth out there that mohawks don't get scared. (vo) how do mohawk iron workers balance work in the sky with life on the reservation? >> it's two different lives he's leading. >> you are data dive, the international olympique committee is announcing the 2020 host city. past results, the 2020 study showed the olympics is the second moss valuable brand worth 46.4 billion, 140 times more valuable than the national bank of greece, when the games started in 776 bc. you would think winning the

games would bring a huge windfall for the host city. not always. montreal left taxpayers $1.5 billion in debt in 1976. it took 30 years to pay that off. on the other hand, the 1992 barcelona games were a huge success. the city's debt grew but it shrank needs for long term infrastructure improvements and tourism skyrocketed. barcelona jumped from 16th most popular destination to third. argentina finished with a $233 million surplus in part because of private financing and they didn't need to build too many venues. atlanta got a revamped light rail, the atlanta braves still play at turner field and the local airport added a concourse for foreign travel. the beijing games were

successful, 40 billion, no debt legacy, china had a budget surplus and the added infrastructure was estimated to be great for chinese economy in the long run. then there are the athens games also known as a greek tragedy. the cumulative debt was 112% of greece's gdp, close to $66,000 per household. so best of luck to the new host city. we hope your games turn to gold. up next: imagine walk out on a steel beam hundreds of feet above the earth just to make a living. why some critics say the school is setting the kids up for failure.

[[voiceover]] no doubt about it,

>> risking their lives for more than a century, mohawk indian ironworkers have helped build nearly every high rise structure in the city. the risk comes with a price. in the u.s. we have had 285 ironworkers die in the last ten years, some mohawk indians. the documentary sky dancer allows us to take a closer look at the native american's dangerous work and how much it

affects their families who remain on homes at a reservation in upstate new york. the document are you focuses on two men one of them sky fox. >> the guy is an incredible walker. he's got a sense of balance that's even a challenge for me to try okeep up with. sometimes he makes you nervous. because you're thinking that oh my god this guy is doing things that you would never imagine that anybody would try in the world. >> makes me nervous to look at it. and joining me from montreal are the, the bravery of mohawk ironworkers has been addressed before in other documentaries and movies. what would you say makes this one different from the rest ?

>> i think because it focuses on the families involved. where the husbands are ironworking, and kind of follows through, follows the family, and sees what they're doing. with the families. >> it doesn't show them alone on the beams, it actually shows the effect on the families. i want to get into that. first let's talk about sky, the work that you guys you used to do, certainly takes a tremendous amount of courage, some might say it's beyond courage it's beyond crazy what you guys do up there. you walk on beams that are only about a foot wide. sometimes the highest skyscrapers up to a thousand feet in the air. there has been a myth for a long time that mohawk ironworkers had some innate skills that allow them to work without fear. your friend featured in the documentary disagrees.

let's hear what he has to say. >> there is myth out there that month hawks don't get scared. there's a mit, this one does get scared. >> generations of mohawk ironworkers have worked on buildings throughout new york. but it started in the early 20th century and the reality was because white men felt it was too dangerous and made them more willing to employ native americans. >> yep, i believe that to be true. and -- >> are you scared at all? i mean so there's no innate fearlessness that comes with being somehow genetic, for mohawk indians that somehow you aren't afraid of heights? >> yeah, i think there is -- there is fear there but fear is a feeling. and i think that the work itself overcomes that feeling to get

done what we need to get done, day-to-day. >> but it's one thing, how does the work overcome that? because you know we just saw you walking around on those steel beams as if you were walk on the ground with no danger of falling. >> yeah, it's just like that, you get focused on what you have to do. the job that you're performing. and it's pretty much your focus, all the time. >> now, bear, the commute to work for mohawk indians who live on the reservation, in upstate new york, is almost six hours each way. the mohawk men have to stay in thing city during the week and only go home on the weekends. how much of a burden is it on the families? >> it was in the beginning of the week when he would first leave it was really hard, like the kids would cry. for their papa, and they wanted

him to stay. it's hard for him to leave but we know that he had to go provide for us. and they'd be crying at the door sometimes, and but during the week, we kind of get used to it. like, him being gone. and then we're so happy when he gets back. and we do some family-time with him for the two days that he's home with us. >> and sky in the documentary you mentioned that it's rough on the men too, living down here, a lot of them lived in brooklyn, talking about how hard it was to be away from your family. let's listen to that. >> in the beginning, it's real calm. and then you start to realize that you're not with your family anymore. and then you start getting lonesome. so then you start drinking and stuff. >> i know drinking has become a problem for many, a problem for you? >> it was -- i never thought it to be a problem.

but it was, i called it a mind-number and just to pacify, i guess. and help the weeks to go by. and look forward to the days when we could just be home, get our time in there for our credits and for our retirement and just go home for a few months. be with the family. >> because it does pay well, it certainly does let you provide well for your family. i want to listen to something you say in the documentary. >> i'd rather be poor and just making it, instead of him being in the other life. >> it is hard on ang ironworker -- on an ironworkers wife. it must be nice to have him home now. how hard was it on you? >> it was hard when he was away, the boys felt when they got to

the teenage age, it was hard for them to listen to him like, when i'm trying to be instructed and then they were starting to not listen, as well, and it was really hard. when sky would come home i would tell them, like, what's going on, and then you know i really missed him being there to help guide the boys, especially the boys they needed their father. >> and you had a bunch of kids. let's go to hermella for a question. >> thanks antonio. this famous photo is featured in sky dabser 11 ion workers taking a break on a steel beam 800 feet above the ground during the construction of the rockefeller building. the national museum has i.ded three of these men as being mohawk but not a lot of people know this.

sky, do you feel your role in building these skyscrapers is underrecognized? >> no. not -- i'm not too sure about that, tell you the truth. never really bothered me. to know, you know, about that. myself. it was just a means to feed the family. and -- >> when we got -- >> i'm sorry, i just want to say -- >> when we go to the city. >> go ahead dear. >> i was just going to say that to sky that when we go to the city and like he can tell me oh my nephew was on this building he helped build this building, you know it's nice that he's able to tell me who is in the building and talking -- >> it's amazing how many they built and among them they credit

build the world trade center and when 9/11 happened they rushed to ground zero. let's listen. >> i ended up working down here as a high steel worker in rescue operation he. mohawks from all over the country rushed to help at ground zero. >> many mohawk indians did the same thing. sky you weren't able to get there, you went and took care of your family but it's amazing that so many mohawk native americans went down there did all that work at a building that they helicopter build and -- helped build and they helped with the tragedy afterwards. i appreciate you being with us tonight. sky dancer will air at 9:00 p.m. eastern time sunday. we hope you will be here too.

>> hello, everyone, this is al jazeera, i'm richelle carey from new york. our top story. >> we're very grateful for the statement that came out of the meeting today with respect to syria, a strong statement about the need for accountability. >> secretary of state john kerry is pushing for support for military action in syria. the country marks their indians day. three different cities going for the gold. one of them will be named in just a few hours as host of the 2020 olympic games.